Judgment
PETER OYINKENIMIEMI AFFEN, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment): Introduction This appeal is an expression of the Appellant’s discontent with the judgment entered in favour of the Respondent by the High Court of Lagos State (coram: Olokoba, J.) on 29th April, 2015 in Suit No. LD/766/2009: Vitol Exploration Nigeria Limited v. LBD International Limited, which judgment lies at pp. 185 – 197 of the records.
The Appellant, LBD International Limited (“LBD”) and the Respondent, Vitol Exploration Nigeria Limited (“Vitol”) are oil exploration companies duly incorporated and organised under the Laws of Nigeria. Vitol alleged that it sold certain 9–5/8 and 13–3/8 well casings to LBD which failed, neglected or refused to pay for them despite repeated demands.
The well casings were jointly owned by both Vitol and Goland Petroleum Development Company Limited (“Goland”) at all material times, but Goland is said to have transferred to Vitol its title in the outstanding debt for the well casings under and by virtue of Dead of Discharge and Release dated 8/4/09. By a writ of summons issued out of the Registry of the High Court of Lagos State on 15/5/09, Vitol (as claimant) claimed the sum of $703.080.00 “being the agreed price for the well casings” against LBD (as defendant).
Vitol equally claimed prejudgment interest thereon calculated on the applicable LIBOR rate (as published on 19/10/07 when payment fell due) plus 3% calculated on a daily basis with effect from that date (i.e. 19/10/07) until judgment, as well as post-judgment interest of 15% per annum. LBD joined issues with Vitol vide a statement of defence, essentially denying the existence of any contract of sale of well casings and/or being indebted to Vitol in the sum claimed or at all.
At the close of plenary trial (whereat both parties fielded one witness apiece), judgment was entered in favour of Vitol against LBD as aforesaid. The Appellant (LBD) faults the judgment on four (4) grounds of appeal set out in the Amended Notice of Appeal filed on 14/10/20 but deemed properly filed and served on 3/3/22. In consonance with the practice and procedure for prosecuting and resisting civil appeals in this Court, the parties filed and exchanged briefs of arguments.
